tv Japanese Officials Examine National Security Strategy CSPAN May 2, 2017 3:23am-4:54am EDT
i m your designated safety officer here accepts are behind you you will go down 1/4 to accept -- exit the stairwell and relocate near "national geographic" if we have to. to get -- today we are delighted to host this discussion with leading lawmakers with expertise of national security. how will introduce other members of the panel that this is known as golden week to join the discussion here under the mount fuji dialogue in your
participants in the dialogue. the corporation goes way back last year professor urged to knock negative issued if the report the u.s.-japan alliance that they kind the called the japan version of the bipartisan report for the future vision of the alliance. and with those experts joining us today are regulars with the mount fuji dialogue most contributing to my immediate left a
member of the house of representatives. >> serving as the defense minister and is deeply involved in the debate from security legislation and new interpretation of the defense policy reform a former member of the defense forces i am sure when they graduated as a second lieutenant people were a bit confused. but i'm shirred is rapid promotion of success so to set in the center is our first guest.
[applause] the member that we hosted the of ministers here in july 2014 with the defense policy with asian alliance to make a big impression and to sit on your right is our next guest who has had a very interesting to weeks. to a sicko from the democratic party of japan november of the of number of japan. is deeply knowledgeable about the strategy and
served as the special adviser national security advisor to the prime minister and the state minister for defense purposes so each guest relative gave brief opening statement. i think what he will speak about his recent experiences and where we are on the defense side negative. ended to talked-about blood redo as allied's but but to
deter those with the head of the defense department because of the japanese coastguard that this under the name of research with that prediction but now with the legal structure so they will explain that but then the response capability that shin be acquired for japan. and the early warning satellite to be included in
but to have that in place of what worries us is the requires very high in knowledge capability one after the other there will be a limit as to the capability of the defending so we really need to counterattack to neutralize enemies base proposal for the first time in history the major averages the counterattack should they possess such a capability but as the counterattack is concerned that they could respond in such a way but
had the possibility of the counterattack. wages want to be able to defend ourselves. however as the it enemies attack us with the advancement of the technology however if we are attacked we feel that what we need of course, that takes cooperation with the united states in not thinking about the possibility of japan with a
counterattack however we should consider having the type of capability we feel a lot of attention retrospect to the behavior but the north korea attention is to attack even though that is a direct attack it is not for the united states to be reconsidered we should further enhance the corporate -- cooperation and what is most importance is these efforts. [applause]
>> good morning. a member of the house of representatives of japan. i am delighted to be here to speak about japan's strategy for the trump demonstration. i became independent two years ago and i am fully in joining the freedom of speech. [laughter] c-span is broadcasting this event i will put my presentation in english to reach as many viewers. is a beef - - share brief presentation to focus on three issues first of a like to talk about the trump bid ministrations and next time with my? overview with the
asia-pacific region and finally to present some proposals to deal with those dynamics during these presidential campaign the widest back term we encountered did restoration to the campaign promises to additional for policy foundations of the united states republicans america's first for policy and viewed
as steven entrenchment. especially the u.s. resolve from the partnership with the bilateral negotiations with the benefit of american progress. and those of you with it -- but president trump's own competition for u.s. the alliance has also been interpreted as part of the deal to mention the session during commitment was to
strengthen the alliance for her and then they amended many of those. with the meeting between the president for its u.s. farm commitment was best provided as an insurance to the allies in the region. as the key members of the national security team that the united states presides far from isolationism the remains and activities meant as pcs peace through strength this is also of
play in asia. united states demonstrates large scale of the cree and peninsula to page eight --- play that pivotal role for those sanctions to continue modernizing nuclear weapons with those capabilities. the trump ministrations proposal to increase military spending and fortified the falls readiness through future technology that moral prospects for u.s. strategy for our allies in asia and europe. we will give you a?
overview of a specific region. in the past several years and they have left together with tremendous efforts with the ever teach check changing of the region and in 2015 we upgraded those followed by the declaration to provide outlines of the operational scope and of legal platform that is more integrated bilateral operations the alliance has been in good shape and i have the positive view
however the alliance needs to have a constant update without which acadia easily dilute from the shocks we will face in coming years. like the rise of china chinese defense budget in 2004. now six times bigger one more than 10 times bigger so we should bear in mind we have to face with the new logic to likely be called inferior to china and the
gap is widening. that nuclear missile program remains the actual threat to national security. so i agreed to the trump demonstration of all of that plan to urge. >> i think this is the right approach. tokyo and washington need to consult with one another fed is the excellent strategy both parties including china and russia are committed to
the denuclearization and this is a great asset that both parties need to retain. however if that temporary reduction but i see the icbm department. >> and with that perspective this is from a long time ago. '' we need here is the alliance strategy for north korea. to maintain costard -- constant superiority and to
be recognized as a nuclear-armed state with the capability against the u.s. intervention there for the repeatedly contended the six party talks is dead but the joint statement in september september 2005 washington and tokyo and seoul, korea need to deny aid the objectives. and then to but this is probably the only way to seek serious negotiations lastly also those proposals
measures including fighter based air defense and cruise missile defense but those must we highlighted. second to have security cooperation and edition to the current set of the wall estimation strategically to insurer, the presence in this region to of operational support among the key allies of and
southeast asia based on the coast region support network across the region under the japan leadership japan and the united states together with also need to ramp up the capacity of the individual states in southeast asia mostly the philippines and vietnam to be constantly challenging and to the of modern town
thank you very much. [applause] >> thanks to each of you for the concise and precise observations on the challenges and possibilities for the allies going forward copper co know a few questions for the statement on the stage then open a progressions. first off i appreciated about the two-stage approach of fourth correa because like you i am skeptical we will get much out of it.
there was some help on the nsc staff pet that we cannot even expect a new pressure will change kim jong-un calculation he has a nuclear weapon. enacted do more harm than good with the deterrence and the credibility in particular. >> so your comment and others all have the one question i want to ask the panel, you said we have to be prepared to create a nuclear program then you mentioned post regional support and then to share
that responsibility than the decision making there has been talk of to bring back that quadrilateral before that the prime minister has proposed but of course, in all of this with the critical role and believe i am correct to say they came very close to agreed to misstatement that an attack by any of buses and attack on all of us but we have these to for reasons in
moving to a statement we have not done any of this of the first question is so probably not nato but different from what we have done in the past. >> you raised the question we will start with you and give us your thoughts with those alliances that have with the collective security arrangements in asia. >>. >> speaking speaking japan
-- space speaking japanese. translator: with the korean peninsula with japan and south to be high end and strengthened whether or not this could be achieved politically that is a very important point we are continuing with the united states for us to beat diverse and now we have to pause to and even russia but it has happened against north korea. currently we are experiencing a tense situation that we always had
a good relationship between japan and the united states but i think asa good opportunity for japan. and in 10 years investigating that money will be strengthening the united states and the renovation of pacific and now i am looking to see how this will develop in for the trump administration asked japan.
the missile was launched by north korea and that was considered is the exercise to attack us bases in japan. they sought for other vessels so they wanted to demonstrate simultaneously at different bases in japan. united states had responsibility as well as japan and i would really like south korea politicians to understand that in order for that security, for korea and japan also has responsibility in that respect. i would like to talk about my
personal view about north korea situation. what worries me most is how the top administration would face north korea. china definitely had some influence over north korea. however, if you look at recent relationship between china and north korea that would give me some doubt. for example, secretary tillerson had a meeting with the north korean president when vice-president pence was pouring asia, north korea conducted a ballistic missile test. it seems to me that north korea is not that concerned about
china and he has been in power for the last five years but he has been in broad at all and hasn't gone to china either. currently and in the past the president of china had the president and then they had a new president of the united states however, as the president had the meeting with president trump before he had the meeting with kim jung-un. i do not believe it's easy to make or development to stop the evil if china exerted more pleasure. once china stopped providing oil
into north korea however, that triggered a talk. even though north korea did not receive. [inaudible] from china it's possible it will get its oil from russia. i have some worry about the impact of the sanction to be imposed by china. the question here is how trump will deal with this. afghanistan and syria the mother bomb was used. it was deployed in japan. there's some posture by the top administration. with that if it continues with the missile and nuclear
development, what could be the next step of trump administration and they will try to be patient like the previous administration did or will north korea respond, what further steps will be taken by the trump administration. their approach by tran needs to be? the east asia is very important. the defense ministries meeting is held regularly. this is in japan and also including us and australia, trilateral meeting take place.
another meeting is held between japan and north korea and there are many issues. however, with this trilateral with south korea things became. [inaudible] for instance, between japan and south korea there is involvement with united states. therefore when the missile is launched momentarily, japan, us and korea can share this information immediately. this will be a milestone. we can only hope that the talks between korea.
the defense leaders meeting was held. that has given very good impact. between japan and united states we do have an alliance. within three countries that kind of similar i can is a may be the military and the higher up level we should increase the relationship between the three countries. the united states had a lot of important roles to say and we are able to provide support to the rest of the world and for the situation quickly impacts japan and japan is able to provide support to the united states.
the arrangement was already made and therefore japan's credibility is impacted. from bilateral to multilateral australia is involved in the india. the relationship is critical with india. the japanese forces are active in djibouti. how to introduce counterterrorism but i think the multilateral approach is more perceptive and therefore security multilateral security.
>> in the unclassified statements from the administration, it seems that there is a consensus that donald trump's first term north korea will develop some kind of icbm capability a missile in a warhead that could potentially hit the united states whether it demonstrated or whether it works . there will be some new threat in the coming years. this has raised concerns about what is called the coupling. the idea that the us would not maintain its nuclear umbrella over japan or korea because it now directly threat. this is not new in the cold war. francis stegall asked would you trade new york for paris when the soviets developed that
capability in the us for the umbrella didn't change, it was strengthened. it's understandable that these concerns would come up now that we face the situationonthe us homeland could be hit directly by a missile. in your comments i heard a little flavor of concerns about the coupling. for example, you said it would not be good if the us and china arranged some freezers north korea that temporarily halted the icbms but kept the missiles that target target japan and korea. that would be an example of a coupling concern. then you talked about the counterstrike ability, service to service medical, seen it should be in the us to be an alliance but i think many people in the us would say from a requirement standpoint, the us doesn't need new -- symbolic and
not just military. could all three of you give our audience a sense of how serious the concern is in japan, public, government about coupling. essentially, is the study of study or is this a real development, real requirement that japan will probably push? should we be worried about this in washington and paying attention? >> translator: the capability of the i think we have a solution
that ballistic missile will balance the launch against japan and intercepted and second and third launch will continue and in order to stop that from happening, the readiness is needed and as were ready to contract. our response capabilities is in hawaii and guam. the bombing from the bases in hawaii and guam would be the major ones and make take time and therefore, we need the readiness in order to keep the second and third launch from coming. we do need to enhance our capability and we need to enhance our safety so japan. [inaudible]
among all the countries in the world when the countries, we did have a defense but by preventing ourselves the other side of from launching an attack japan is a country that does not have that capability. of course, that does not mean the asian war but when the second attack is carried out by the enemy we do have the flexibility of self-defense. to keep our enemy. that is constitutional and that is our interpretation of the constitution. what we have to do at the government we made a proposal to the prime minister about this and within the collaboration between japan and the united states we do need to. [inaudible]
>> translator: prior to the inauguration of the top administration because president trump served america first and america's more important. we wonder what would happen with their engagement in east asia? however, president trump when he became president the first summit he had with prime minister where they played golf, established a friendly relationship and trust. secretary mattis and secretary tillerson both of them came to japan after they were appointed to the positions and i understand they have a lot of knowledge of japan. strategically the importance, i
think, this is the time when we have to discuss the strategic importance between the japan and the united states. we will need to shoulder to assist this alliance and we really should play the role and responsible manner and those need to be worked out. the counterattack against enemies base have to do with japan's security. not so that we can secure our safety entirely upon the united states but the information gets around quickly and you a d.
[inaudible] information could be shared between allies and based on that they can devise the responsibility so the arm and shield will be responsible in providing shield and which one is responsible at providing. that needs to be clarified and we should discuss more about the biological, chemical weapons we really need to prevent proliferation of such dangerous weapons. that is the system to manage such situations and we need to
impose sanctions if it's violated so by providing deference we continue to preserve a flexible deterrent strategy. we really need to give a very strong support to that. as far as the coupling discussion has been going on for a long time among experts particularly in europe. japan is now facing such a situation. current situation in the korean peninsula that the media, communications, has become intense.
japanese public has become worried and concerned so the discussion has become so heated that we need to maintain calm. we rely, japan, on nuclear deterrence and in spite of such situation there is not much japan can do so we ask japan and the united states do and then the united states and china discussed the things to work things out and there is not much role to be played by japan. it's kind of an awkward situation. i think that's what this discussion needs to be done. of course the counterattack capabilities i think possesses the ability is necessary however
, the defense corporations between japan and the united states has to be conducted in very, very is different levels for example, by sharing information so we can determine where we can launch the interceptors. by them having lots of layers of corporations would further strengthen japan and the united states. >> thank you. why don't we take questions from the audience. you can direct it to a member appear or, yeah, right appear. >> thank you. currently teaching. thank you for an excellent
presentation. my question is regarding the terrible event if there were an attack on japan it would be a large number of civilian casualties that would require humanitarian systems. the japan self defense force work together were wonderfully six years ago after the tsunami and earthquake in eastern japan. my question is given the dangers of an enemy attack are the self-defense force in the us military planning on working together on how to provide large-scale humanitarian help in the future if needed and is planning going to include working with the civilian authorities for the disaster relief in japan? >> translator: i think more than ten years ago we passed the
contingency law and in it there is a lot requiring reflection of the citizens. at the time of the contingency how to protect life of the citizens. even at the municipal level were being prepared when the missile was launched actually evacuation exercises were conducted in. [inaudible] of course, us forces in japan will act together, whether us and we need to consider the possibility of receiving support from us forces and at the time of operation it was effective support was provided by the us forces.
we would like to continue conducting exercise based on the plan. at the time of the earthquake i was one of the people affected by this earthquake and actually saw with my own eyes how much support was provided by us forces. at the time of such a disaster i think, us support is critical then if an attack was made and we need the support. what's important is to prevent such an attack and for that we need diplomacy and missile defense. we have the system called j alert if north korea actually comes to japan, immediately
japanese government, the center government, would send alert over the municipal government and each municipal government is going to issue alert over and then we receive such alert by mobile phones. however, it will only take a few minutes for a missile to lunch. if so, we need to figure out a way to evacuate people and then provide shelters. i think the relief of the affected people is very very important. twenty years ago between japan and the united states has been discussed. after that, about the assumption of this kind of emergency the
program had been activated. of course, between the allocate in the united states because they were allied forces, how to evacuate noncombatants. they had seen a lot of programs updated but between japan and south korea, as far as i know, between japan and south korea the japanese are noncombatants in fuel. jointly and since then to overseas. there is not much discussion and plan formulated between the two governments and therefore at this moment we do that seriously from the same situation could happen at any time and therefore , sharing needs to be
improved but the saving of the evacuees. i think that is very important starting point for us to conduct a discussion between japan and south korea. the united states has a an important role to play in that. when we evacuate from the korean peninsula, when the us forces or us carry south evacuation the nationals may join in so i think between japan and us also their cooperation is needed. >> thank you very much. in recent years traveling to japan one hears that japan's concerns for security are centered on china where as many japanese perceive the united states was more worried about north korea. based on your comments today it sounds like you have now changed
your perspective on the ranking or ordering of the threat. first, could you comment, is that accurate? is it driven by the missile tests that were explicitly described as targeting japan? in years past japanese been very worried that japan might be bypassed by the united states in favor of working with china in order to address regional and global problems. do you sense any fear that this is something you are seen happening? do you have any advice for the administration to make sure that japan is not bypassed? thank you. >> translator: the concern is that china therefore the ministry expansion of china. china has been expanding and together with that existing
interests and territorial water, expansion by china and for japan the east china sea is important in the territory. therefore from the japanese defensive posture we do have to predict and south china sea the coral reef that cannot be tolerated in that is the place where the japan uses the ceiling . they have facilities built their safety and japan should collaborate with the rest of the world so that japan should commence china to follow the world by the international community. the difference between north
korea and china that china is able to consult diplomatically. north korea diplomacy it cannot work. therefore, the thing facing us as north korea should be currently china is using the lateral approach trying to change the south china sea. japan and russia used to have a good relation and when i was the defense minister, it was first carried out very good relationship but at that point russia trade out being electoral the change of status in ukraine in the ukraine from japan but we should not tolerate the coercive
that change of status and therefore together with united states japan carried out sanctions with russia and the country relationship have been somewhat strained. i think that is a universal principle for anything that is contrary to this inconsistent with that that is a basic principle of the united states and therefore japan and the united states should be firm up against china to convince to coercive or change the status is not tolerable in the china can respond to that diplomatically. the chinese threat is i don't know if we can call it a threat,
it's a long-term threat. we should separate the two kinds of threats. in any case, we have a great concern about training activities and there is the administration and that's our perception only that the trumpet ministration security and trade issues that administration uses the trade and they decided not to use the currency money status with china. while that is done in a security picture, china takes a different approach and during the last three years during the obama administration, the island proclamation was underway so rapidly so we requested it and
after the burst of the trump administration, i may be wrong and correct me if i'm wrong but the corporation has not been carried out in a month since the trump administration. while you look at the situation of china and the islands in south china sea the fighters seem to exist. they are just in training or if they're formally deployed, they say that the aircraft would not be useful will it terry but the military aircraft exist there and that is a fact. therefore as time passes the strategic balance seems to weigh more heavily and more advantageously to china and
therefore this is not a deal. it should be there to prepare for the best interest. >> in the front row we have the best and brightest of japan's national security. the reality is we can probably get many members to fill the rose would agree with what you're saying. i think there is a pretty strong consensus among political about japan's strategy going forward and people can tell me i'm wrong later but i would argue among american allies to the ellice there are more consensus on strategy in japan than anywhere. i'd include korea and australia. that's all quite impressive. at the same time, the national
security legislation was a hard, hard legislative fight and almost half of japanese opposed it. some people pointed out the opinion polls show that if japan were attacked only 11 or 12% of deputies would to joined the defense voices. if you do the math that's a 10 million man army, 20 times the defense core unless everyone who answered was 75 or 80 years old. we don't know. you do in a way. you're in the intersection of strategy and politics. what is your sense of the japanese role on public opinion on the security challenges on the self-defense forum, defense
policy reform on for example, counterattack against any basis. are you a way ahead of the public for do you think you're just in front of the public? where's public opinion? >> translator: i think it's very important for an assistant to do the work looking ahead and when we try to when the security japan us security, the trinity, there is huge opposition and there was some in the protest. however, now i see hardly any
japanese would think that there shouldn't be or that there is no need for security treaty. if time goes on we will be able to understand the importance of security legislation. when we discuss about security two years ago we said in order to counter from north korea not only should chips owned by japan but also the ship owned by the united states are necessary. if there is a huge crisis in korea then we need to deal with a lot of.
[inaudible] those are examples for which represented the to the public. currently we have this tension that i know, however inflation is already in place that we can deal with it. we really need to take leadership position and looking ahead. two years ago the democratic party of japan opposed against the legislation and we did not agree. [inaudible] i left the democratic party of japan because of that. i felt of course security
shouldn't be too much security arrangements should not be too little. however, we have some doing too much in that area however, these days i think people really recognize that too little security is not enough. we really have to put necessary legislation was the discussion with public however, at that time, two years ago, a position in the party criticize this issue too much. one thing i would like to add is that in 2003 the secretary made reference to the agency in 2003. at that time the. [inaudible] party of japan and played a very
important role. they passed legislation however two years ago it didn't happen. we failed to form a political consensus. probably the lbp should be a little what was a little too arrogant and i think they really have to listen, and if that kind of environment were built then some of the opposition party members would have agreed to that. that was rather unfortunate.
>> when he was in the opposition and answering questions, was he the best? because he knew so much? or was he the worst questioner because he knew so much? >> translator: i think he is always one step ahead of all ruling parties. he's forthcoming and however he's realistically had to oppose against it but he, there are two members of the democratic party of japan who had progressive view. we are talking about constitutions about what's unfortunate is democratic party of japan negative of us having a
discussion on the constitution issues. for example, just to hold the meeting is very, very difficult. they are very reluctant and one of the members in the proposed meeting was so criticized in that party that he was very discouraged so even within the party there was not much discussion going on in regard to constitution so japan, i hope, the democratic party of japan should deal with this issue in most areas. >> thank you for contribution,.